About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 9
CNNW 4
CNN 2
KQED (PBS) 2
WUSA (CBS) 2
CSPAN2 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
says that mr. obama wants big government, not a big economy. >> republicans have tried to persuade the president of the need for a course correction. but weeks of negotiations have shown that his commitment to big government is simply too great to lead to the kind of long-term reforms we need. >> question. when the negotiations started, president obama was looking for a big deal. $4 trillion in spending cuts and tax hikes. has the big deal turned into a big fizzle, pat buchanan? >> it has not, john. did it for awhile but now it is back, and we're talking about something close to adds 4 trillion deal. the president is deep in negotiations with boehner and cantor, and here are the terms. you raise the debt ceiling, at the same time there are 3 trillion in cuts, and they deal with social security and medicare. there is no revenue enhancement. however, you get together some kind of commission which what it does, john, it drops tax rates in return for giving away these deductions, exemptions, allowances, breaks, which in effect is pure reaganism. there's one problem with that. there's a
it is that momentous. the flurry of talk last week about going big and swinging for the fences were underscoring the idea of the president and the speaker to persuade the democratic and republican rank- and-file to go for something as big as $4 trillion. it was a long shot to begin with. both sides decided to spend a few days pursuing this long shot and it turns out that speaker behner blinked first. he was the first one to realize publicly that he did not have the votes in his own troops to get this through because it would require too much. host: if the number goes down from $4 trillion, what gets left behind? guest: you go from $4 trillion down to something. the fall back number we think is $2.50 trillion. that is the amount of deficit reduction that would be necessary to get republicans to vote for an equivalent amount of debt ceiling increase. that is what is required to keep the treasury in the flush to get for the next election. that is the number and we know that the vice president had six members of congress and they were pretty close. they were at about $2 trillion. entirely from the s
is it shows that the united states system is not set up to do big things. when a crisis like this comes up they cannot do a deal that would show stability to the world. >> ronald reagan and tip o'neal made big deals. in the 1990s, bill clinton and the republican congress made big deals. and mika, it's not over yet, but it has gotten to the point already that this is damaging the reputation of the united states the longer it goes, and i think we're talking about it damaging our reputation more every day that the crisis goes on. >> i think both sides would agree with that. after a weekend of meetings resulting in yet another impasse, president obama is canceling two fundraisers today to continue negotiations. senate majority leader harry reid said the talks broke down last night because of the republicans insistence on a short-term deal, and their plan would cut $2.7 trillion over the next ten years. officials say it raises the debt ceiling but no tax increases. and he salaid out his latest solution. >> there will be a two-stage possible. it's not physically possible to do this in one step.
the cliff thelma and louise style but 43% of independents say what's the big deal? >> what's the pugh research? they only talk to 764 people. >> they did it all yesterday afternoon. >> by the way, we have a panel of independent voters coming up to see how they're feeling about the debt ceiling debate because obviously, they are the coveted group. >> that panel, 765. >> all right. >> a little bit bigger. >> we go to a panel of one. steve winn is the ceo of winn resorts. they have those casinos and stuff like that in vegas. he was on a conference call with investors and investment banks yesterday and he really let the president of the united states have it. we've got some quotes from the conference call. he says, here you go. "i'm saying it bluntly, that this administration is the greatest wet blanket to business and progress and job creation in my lifetime. and i can prove it and i can spend the next three hours giving you examples of all of us in this marketplace that are frightened to death about all the new regulations, our health care costs escalate, regulations coming from left
out the president has a big birthday bash scheduled for august 3rd, celebrities flying in from all over. and lo and behold, august 2nd is the deadline for getting something done so that he can have this massive -- maybe the biggest fundraising dinner in history for a birthday celebration. >> and here's iowa congressman steve king. >> it's not default. they've been calling it default to try to stampede people into taking a bad deal here in this congress. the american people understand this. they understand at least intuitively that it would be the president who would willfully default if there's to be a default. i'd like to think the investor markets understand that, too. >> keeping them honest, there's little reason to think that's true. and plenty of people in the gop establishment and the business community sending up warning flairs. officials at the bond rating company standard & poors today briefing freshman republicans about what might happen. political reporting tonight they were cautioned that one possibility is "a death spiral in the bond market". s & p is already on record
been going on now since the big deal talks between boehner and obama broke down on friday among all the congressional leaders on how to fix basically one problem. that is, how long the debt limit increase we will do. they have not been able to resolve that problem. host: do you think there's a chance the house really will leave town? guest: i do not know. no one would confirm that. there were rumors yesterday, mainly from democrats. republicans said they had heard nothing like that. democrats also said they would be surprised if the house would do that. it will look terrible with this crisis hanging over the nation. crisis hanging over the nation. it has happened in on other occasions. host: lori montgomery, according to the senate schedule, harry reid will be announcing the schedule at 11:00 a.m. have you heard anything? guest: i have not. when i left last night, it was not clear. they were still planning to proceed as they have been talking about for a week. that is, when the house bill comes over, they want to tilt it -- to kill it. it's not clear how they will do that. will they
with big business. they break stories on big business is being corrupt. then you have the right of center papers that are obsessed with big corporations -- i mean, with big government. there. it is cool parity i am not for the outing -- the suppression of the adding of corrupt republicans. there is a huge difference. i am totally for all of these republican screwballs to get into trouble getting fired or quit saying today that they get caught, not stretching out for three ludicrous unbelievably weeks. thank you very much, congressman weiner. thank you. i loved every second of it, congressman weiner. especially the hack part. i am the hacker. so we are fighting back. we are entering a phase where objective and neutral journalism is now laughable thing of the fast. it does not exist. i met the people that trotter pretzel themselves into being totally neutral. no one is neutral in the entire world. you have used the cudgel of false neutrality as a means to push the american narrative to the left for the last 40 years. to hell with it. i am sorry that i am being honest and i believe in freedo
sure the motion gets scored and that could be a big pickup in this whole process. that allows things to die. >> that will give them three days to hate it. >> you don't want to deal hanging out there so long because hit a pi like anata. you don't want rank-and-file members to feel like it was crammed down their throats striking that balance on the timing will be critical. >> the deadline to get some the to the floor is what to t? the house republicans announced they canceled one of their work. in their district. >> economists have told me that you will start to seek markets get a little spooked. by the end of next week or early the following week. that is something that will make it from both sides want to avoid. >> does that put more pressure on them? >> absolutely. >> in the week after, they will need a couple of days to debate it in the house and the senate could do it within hours if they have an agreement. if no one tries to filibuster, it will be fairly quick. they should probably start the debate by this week. >> thank you for being part of our program. [captioning performed by
for the tabloids. host: what about the broadsheets? guest: it is known occasionally. there was a big scandal about mp's expenses last year, which came from information that is the voice of -- information that is the will serve and got on a computer disk. my newspaper paid for that because they thought it was in the public interest. that is a rare instance of a broadsheet paper paying for information. for the tabloids, we call it checkbook journalism. salacious information about a night out on the town with a celebrity or pop star or encounters with celebrities. that culture has grown and become more insidious over the past 20 or 30 years. host: how would you describe, to help put it in perspective -- by the way, we will put the numbers on the screen as we continue this conversation about the phone hacking investigation in the u.k. prime minister cameron spoke this morning at a problem about it and we carry that live on c- span -- spoke this morning in parliament about it and we carry that live on c-span2. we carry rupert murdoch and rebekah brooks yesterday and we will speak about that. how do you
social security, you don't get a penny of it. every penny of that goes into the big pot and it's distributed to everyone else. anybody who dies to young, all of their money has been wasted. it is just going into the government pot. the second thing you have to know, is if you save up to much, when you start receiving it, you get taxed on it again. if you get taxed on social security when you are your money what you are working and then after you start receiving it, if you save up to much because you were worried about it, you get taxed on it again. it gets added to whatever income you have from your savings. host: do you think private savings accounts, that your social security should be yours when you pay in, you should be booked to get or keep or transfer? caller: i certainly do. that is why i voted for president bush to the second time around. i did not agree with him for very much but i agree with him on that point. people should have their names on their accounts and what ever they put into it should belong to them. so even if they die when their 50, that money goes to the
, then we're all in big trouble. host: where do you think that that compromise needs to start? in which house? in the senate? does the president need get involved with this? caller: obviously now with this filibuster, the compromise needs start there. they can have no debate while this filibuster is going on and that's ridiculous at this point in time. it's simply asinine. host: last night, it a news conference, majority leader harry reid talked about compromise and criticized the republican efforts to filibuster his debt plan. this is what he had to say. >> >> tonight a bipartisan party rejected the boehner short-term plan. clearly, we've seen something we've even a lot in the senate but this time, the country's attention is focused on it, a filibuster. a filibuster to prevent us from moving forward on this legislation. the vote that i put forth is a compromise. we would have changed it more but as i indicated on the floor, we had no one to negotiate with. it really is a worst possible time in conducting a filibuster. they're forcing us to wait until tomorrow morning at -- let's see. t
for big oil and wall street executives. this bill's actually more extreme than the republican budget passed in april calling for deeper cuts and more hardships for the middle class and older americans. in fact, this bill does nothing to create jobs, nor invest in the roads, bridges, clean energy technology and job training that would really get our economy moving. in short, h.r. 2560 will stifle growth, hurt middle class families and undercut america's seniors. in my district there are over 93,000 social security beneficiaries and over 85,000 medicare enrollees. on behalf of my constituents and for future generations i stand in strong opposition to this bill and the rule. i know that there are those on the other side of the aisle who want to support a reasonable plan to reduce the deficit. this is not the plan. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject this dangerous proposal and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: mr. speaker, at this time i'm please
, but it means, mr. president, that we can't be raising taxes on the job creators, and there is a big debate right now about how do we get ourselves out of this fiscal mess. i would submit to my colleagues that the real issue here is spending. if you go back to the foundation of our country, the year 1800, we were only spending 2% of our entire economic output on the government, the federal government. this year we're going to spend 24% to 25%. the historical average over the past 40 years is about 20.6%. we are dramatically higher in terms of what we are spending on our federal government as a percentage of our entire economy. to me, clearly, we don't have a revenue issue here in washington. we have a spending issue. which would suggest that we ought to get after spending, after federal spending, particularly spending that is -- is duplicative, redundant, there are so many things in the federal government that we spend money on that we need to get that waste and that -- and all those types of wasteful spending out of our spending here in washington, d.c., but we also have to focus on those
. there was a big issue at the end of the last congress that threatened a meltdown over whether or not we were going to extend the package of tax cuts. then we have the cr, threatening to shut down of the government. now we are having a high-stakes game of chicken that could have significant implications for the global economy as well as devastation for what we face to going forward. and then you know what? we will be right back with that with the budget, not once but twice, before the election. most in the house want to see something that is more sustainable and allows us to get back to the business of helping all americans get back to work, rebuilding the country, and dealing with long-term solutions rather than short-term fixes to deal with theoretical issues with the budget. host: to be clear, if the reid proposal could come before the house, would you vote for it? guest: i have not seen it. i had a dinner with a friend of mine in the senate last night who says that they are interested in the details. they have not seen the details yet. i am not going to commit to something that no one i know ha
company called two men with big hearts moving and storage. but he fell behind in his bills to this company. this storage company because of medical bills that had piled up for him. >> so he just passed away and the family is trying to figure out what they're going to do at the funeral and what they would like to do is get a hold of some of his military stuff, including his two purple hearts but the problem is that particular company is owed by the family $600. the family went over and talked to them and they knocked it down to $500. but nonetheless, they would like to have the stuff for the funeral next tuesday but they got to come up with $500. here's the son of the veteran. >> he was a very patriotic person. >> dad wanted to go out in a blaze of glory. that was on the back of the fire truck. something we want to give for dad. that was one of his last requests. >> he had it for five years. it would be thousands of dollars. don kennedy owns the company so he's not going to release the stuff as of right now unless they pay the $500 which is just -- they just want to get the -- they want t
't be a big deal. i'll give you a few seconds to look them in the eye and say, you're wrong. >> yeah, i think you're wrong. now, of course, i don't know for sure. this is unprecedented but there is a $23 billion social security payment due on august 3rd that is not at all clear that there will be enough cash in the treasury to make that payment. so i think david is right. why would you want to take that chance? tp doesn't make sense. not for the social security recipients or for the economy or entire global financial system. >> david walker, the president meets with speaker boehner over the weekend and they are clearly not making any tangible progress. the house will go forward this week and senate will most likely vote on a balanced budget amendment and some other things that simply, to be honest, can't pass or even if they did pass the president would veto. they will move to the mcconnell plan and convince the republicans that they have your vote. do those votes undermine confidence in the market in a deal that might be reached? >> well, i think the markets know that those are not going to
this procedural vote to our viewers and what it means. the big vote still to come. >> wolf, they have something in the rules committee that allows members of congress to basically strike the last word if there's ame amendments and stuff that must go to it. this is a procedural vote. >> you used to work for the speaker of the house when he was newt gingrich. >> the motion is the minority party's shot at an alternative. it will be defeated by the majority. >> it's been really intense over these past 24 hours. it looked very gloomy for the speaker, john boehner. all of a sudden they sweetened the pot for the tea party supporters, freshman republicans, and now it looks like he's going to get this language passed. >> a guaranteed vote on the balanced budget amendment. i think that the speaker of the house would not even be bringing this up if he were not absolutely sure that he did not have the votes to pass it which is why he didn't bring it up yesterday. what's interesting about this is we watched for hours last night. people going in and out of his office. pizza being delivered and all the rest.
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)